• NEW! LOWEST RATES EVER -- SUPPORT THE SHOW AND ENJOY THE VERY BEST PREMIUM PARACAST EXPERIENCE! Welcome to The Paracast+, eight years young! For a low subscription fee, you can download the ad-free version of The Paracast and the exclusive, member-only, After The Paracast bonus podcast, featuring color commentary, exclusive interviews, the continuation of interviews that began on the main episode of The Paracast. We also offer lifetime memberships! Flash! Take advantage of our lowest rates ever! Act now! It's easier than ever to susbcribe! You can sign up right here!

    Subscribe to The Paracast Newsletter!

Listener Round Table

Free episodes:

Forums New posts
goggsmackay said:
I can't believe how many posts this topic from the show generated. Not that it's not an interesting or important topic, but it's not paranormal!
Click to expand...
The data proving global warming is apparently invisible...like a ghost. They can't seem to find the original data they based the computer models on.
 
Jimi H. said:
I agree, it's not a paranormal phenomenon.

However, I imagine that Gene and Chris brought it up because many seem to think that it is a conspiracy pulled on the public by all of the top science institutions.

My opinion: If there is a conspiracy worth mentioning, it's that many private religious or fossil fuel-backed interest groups/websites continuously spawn non-science to muddy the waters. It's ideologically and politically motivated.

What is highly disconcerting to me as an American citizen, is that the anti-intellectual attitude (looking at you neo-cons/religious right) makes people distrust scientists and the thinkers, all the while eating up the propaganda of political preachers and big business. I imagine that it's easier to understand that Jesus takes care of the world and that money is good, than it is to understand invisible chemical processes in the atmosphere and the ethical imperative that follows: The energy sector has to change.

I think the issue has made clear the level of hypocrisy of many conspiracy theorists. They become tools because they don't understand the science, and can't be bothered to find proper sources. (Like Chris O'Brien explained: add .edu to your Google search..)

The vilification of Al Gore is very sad imo, and dis-heartening. First of all, some people like to portray him as an opportunist. But the fact of the matter is that he's been writing books about the environment and environmental politicis for decades. Mind you, books that are quite informed! From early on, Gore recognized that without a healthy environment, the people are not free. Having to pay a company to supply water 'cleaned' with chloride etc. is not freedom. Freedom is drinking unpolluted water from the brook, or the well. Brains damaged because of leaded gasoline was not freedom, except for the companies that made money on it, and couldn't bother with the environmental effects. Unregulated business unchecked is not freedom for the people. Time to wake from that slumber, and side with the people.

Oh, and the Bush clan who does major fossil fuel biz cheated Gore of a presidency. A case of corruption, a coup!! And a massive blow to the environment, to you and me. Yet the 'truth-loving' conspiracy theory guys think Al Gore is the bad guy!?
The hypocrisy is mindblowing, and shameful.
Click to expand...
LMAO... Gore is an idiot and a tool. His books and movie are so full of errors they are now considered science fiction. Al Gore IS INDEED A BAD GUY and only bringing GREEN to his WALLET... PERIOD.
 
Pixelsmith,

Global Warming Petition Project
Is there a scientific consensus on global warming?
Climate Change: Consensus
Climate Change: Evidence

The Mechanism: Radiative forcing - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

If you don't understand the mechanism and yet you continue to make arguments against AGW and ad hominem attacks against public figures who try to educate the ignorant population on REAL climate science, then you have no argument and no one is going to take you seriously.

How do we know more CO2 is causing warming and that that humans are the main cause (if in doubt, read the rebuttal to a common myth "well volcanoes emit more CO2 than humans)? -go read Go read
volcanoes emit more CO2 than humans?

And the consensus?

To name a few:

National Aeronautics and Space Administration

American Association for the Advancement of Science

American Chemical Society

American Geophysical Union

American Medical Association

American Meteorological Society

American Physical Society

The Geological Society of America


...


What's your argument?
 
dead-horse.gif
 
Michael Allen said:
Pixelsmith,

Global Warming Petition Project
Is there a scientific consensus on global warming?
Climate Change: Consensus
Climate Change: Evidence

The Mechanism: Radiative forcing - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

If you don't understand the mechanism and yet you continue to make arguments against AGW and ad hominem attacks against public figures who try to educate the ignorant population on REAL climate science, then you have no argument and no one is going to take you seriously.

How do we know more CO2 is causing warming and that that humans are the main cause (if in doubt, read the rebuttal to a common myth "well volcanoes emit more CO2 than humans)? -go read Go read
volcanoes emit more CO2 than humans?

And the consensus?

To name a few:

National Aeronautics and Space Administration

American Association for the Advancement of Science

American Chemical Society

American Geophysical Union

American Medical Association

American Meteorological Society

American Physical Society

The Geological Society of America


...


What's your argument?
Click to expand...
That is some funny $hit. oh wait... are you being serious?
 
Michael Allen did you know that a couple kilometers below the earths crust it is several million degrees? That is a REAL climate science fact from public figure Al Gore. :D
 
Gore's science fiction movie was found by a High Court Judge to contain at least 9 errors and was also found to be alarmist and political in nature, it was banned from being shown in UK schools. It can only be shown with guidance notes to "prevent political indoctrination". In other words it is bullshit and politically motivated. Al Gore said the rising sea was going to drown millions of people yet he purchased ocean view homes.. go figure.. Now he has sold his Current TV to big oil funded Al Jazeera for a tidy 100 million dollar profit. He knows how to make his lifestyle VERY green.
 
Ok, let's get the facts straight:
"Mr Justice Burton said he had no complaint about Gore's central thesis that climate change was happening and was being driven by emissions from humans. However, the judge said nine statements in the film were not supported by mainstream scientific consensus." BBC NEWS | UK | Education | Gore climate film's nine 'errors'

That was in 2007, and imo Gore's 'alarmism' seems more and more justified. 2007 estimates of sea-level rise were underestimates, something which has gotten more and more clear even in that short time.

Gore is not a scientist, he is a popularizer of science. He has a judge's words that the central thesis is solid according to scientific consensus (so now we know that there is a consensus, right Pixietroll?). And he's been quite succesful explaining the science, evident in the hatred the deniers have bestowed upon him, his political opponents even tried to silence him by stealing an election! (Where are the conspiracy guys when we need them?)

But it's all about the issue, and you've got some reading to do yet.
 
pixelsmith said:
I find it very problematic when consensus is considered "science fact". ..
Click to expand...
That's funny.

You post that Gore made errors, so you should know that the errors were ruled as 'errors' according to scientific consensus. Right?

But then you turn around and say that 'scientific consensus' is meaningless? :rolleyes:

Cherry-picking again!!!

It's all just soundbytes for you, picked up here and there. Pointless.
 
No one in their right mind will deny climate change is not happening. We would not be here if it didn't. How do you think polar bears got white? You've clearly got some reading to do yet... :D next you will be saying the arctic ice caps are melting.. :rolleyes:

so... do you get your science from Bill Nye the science guy?
 
Dr. Holdren (obama's science advisor) in Ecoscience:


The effects of a new ice age on agriculture and the supportability of large human populations scarcely need elaboration here. Even more dramatic results are possible, however; for instance, a sudden outward slumping in the Antarctic ice cap, induced by added weight, could generate a tidal wave of proportions unprecedented in recorded history.

If man survives the comparatively short-term threat of making the planet too cold, there is every indication he is quite capable of making it too warm not long thereafter. For the remaining major means of interference with the global heat balance is the release of energy from fossil and nuclear fuels. As pointed out previously, all this energy is ultimately degraded to heat. What are today scattered local effects of its disposition will in time, with the continued growth of population and energy consumption, give way to global warming. … Again, the exact form such consequences might take is unknown; the melting of the ice caps with a concomitant 150-foot increase in sea level might be one of them.
Click to expand...

As you can see the science is not settled when our nations science czar flip flops depending on which way the thermometer was reading. This suggest more than science is involved, it suggests a political agenda and control of the population, in more ways than you can imagine.
 
pixelsmith said:
I find it very problematic when consensus is considered "science fact". I could probably go right down Michael's consensus list and show the corruption within each organization. Individuals from many of them have jumped ship because of corruption and deceit. Here is a letter of resignation from the APS by Hal Lewis: Hal Lewis: My Resignation From The American Physical Society | The Global Warming Policy Foundation (GWPF)
Click to expand...

Well that's what I was hoping you would try to do...how about you just go look at the ice core data? Or go read up on the actual mechanism behind global warming?

Or we can go round and round...

Hal Lewis resigns from The American Physical Society | ThinkProgress


Apparently Hal Lewis doesn't know a thing about climate science...so why do we care again?

*chirp*

*chirp*

*chirp*

I guess now you're going to play the GOTCHA card and say "hey you just said Hal Lewis doesn't know a thing about climate science!!--that means that everyone else in APS doesn't either!"

Yeah, which is why members are leaving APS in droves, right?

RealClimate: The Montford Delusion
 
pixelsmith said:
Michael Allen did you know that a couple kilometers below the earths crust it is several million degrees? That is a REAL climate science fact from public figure Al Gore. :D
Click to expand...

Yep...keep digging yourself in and doubling down on nonsense...there's plenty of recommended reading for people like yourself:

Global warming comes from within – A Few Things Ill Considered

And let’s not forget that what we are talking about is climate change, not just climate. So we need some kind of change in this heat flux if we wish to explain a change in the global temperature. Scientists have calculated that increased greenhouse gases have resulted in a radiative forcing of 2.43 Wm-2 which means we need that many Watts/m2 of change to account for the current warming. Back to geothermal, this means the energy flow from the earth would have had to jump by over 200 times to be the cause of the approxiamately .8oC temperature rise.
Click to expand...
 
Back
Top